Zonealarm and CHKDSK

[the insider]

I know that KAV had some serious issues with CHKDSK lately but has ZA antivirus experienced the same trouble since they use the Kaspersky engine as well ???

[Firecat]

{QUOTE-> I know that KAV had some serious issues with CHKDSK lately but has ZA antivirus experienced the same trouble since they use the Kaspersky engine as well ??? <-QUOTE}
Yes, ZoneAlarm AntiVirus faces the same problems with chkdsk as it uses the same technologies which cause the problems with KAV.

[ccsito]

Yes, ZA AV is a rebranded version of the KAV engine. So it should function nearly the same way as the original version of the AV program. There probably are subtle differences between the program versions, but they should function essentially in the same manner.

[C.S.J]

you sure about this.....?

f-secure has never had these issues, also with KAV engine.

[Firecat]

{QUOTE-> you sure about this.....?

f-secure has never had these issues, also with KAV engine. <-QUOTE}
F-Secure does not have these issues as it uses a different method to improve the scanning speed (though it is not nearly as effective as Kaspersky's iSwift). The decision to not use iSwift probably had something to do with the fact that it would not benefit the other engines in F-Secure running alongside the Kaspersky engine; hence the scan time reduction would be insignifcant as the other engines are going to be scanning regardless.

For the same reason I think GDATA AVK might also not be using the iSwift technology; but only a GDATA user can verify that for sure.

As for ZoneAlarm Antivirus, it does indeed use the iSwift technology, and comes with all related issues including the problems with chkdsk.

[C.S.J]

so basically, they have messed up a few machines with this 'technology' just to improve scanning speed?

[Macstorm]

{QUOTE-> For the same reason I think GDATA AVK might also not be using the iSwift technology; but only a GDATA user can verify that for sure. <-QUOTE}
I use gdav but i can't confirm this for sure.
My 'full system scans', with either gdav or kav, takes about equal time: gdav:58m. kav:49m.

[Macstorm]

{QUOTE-> F-Secure does not have these issues as it uses a different method to improve the scanning speed (though it is not nearly as effective as Kaspersky's iSwift). The decision to not use iSwift probably had something to do with the fact that it would not benefit the other engines in F-Secure running alongside the Kaspersky engine; hence the scan time reduction would be insignifcant as the other engines are going to be scanning regardless.

For the same reason I think GDATA AVK might also not be using the iSwift technology; but only a GDATA user can verify that for sure. <-QUOTE}
Hi Firecat,

Here is my results after scanning 'my docs' folder using the engineA (kav) only (as you suggested in the PM sent :) )

7579 files checked:

-first scan took 4m.16s.
-second scan took just 46secs :o

Then, it's likely the iSwift technology is active and working in GDAV.

[Firecat]

{QUOTE-> Hi Firecat,

Here is my results after scanning 'my docs' folder using the engineA (kav) only (as you suggested in the PM sent :) )

7579 files checked:

-first scan took 4m.16s.
-second scan took just 46secs :o

Then, it's likely the iSwift technology is active and working in GDAV. <-QUOTE}
Another test you can do is to check your hard disk drives for a file called fidbox.dat (may be a hidden file, use the most stringent search options to find this file). If this file is present then AVK is definitely using iSwift ;)

[Macstorm]

{QUOTE-> Another test you can do is to check your hard disk drives for a file called fidbox.dat (may be a hidden file, use the most stringent search options to find this file). If this file is present then AVK is definitely using iSwift ;) <-QUOTE}
Thanks Firecat.
No, it's not present, i searched within hidden files using the xp search tool and the FileFinder module from jv16PT. ???